BarclayWazza 91 Posted September 10, 2018 Am I right in saying Nepo Tom was responsible for the failed sponsorship of the South Stand by that coffee company? If so, I''d hardly suggest that he''s that intelligent! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TCCANARY 263 Posted September 10, 2018 [quote user="BarclayWazza"]Am I right in saying Nepo Tom was responsible for the failed sponsorship of the South Stand by that coffee company? If so, I''d hardly suggest that he''s that intelligent![/quote]No you''re not right, that was a wind up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TIL 1010 4,738 Posted September 10, 2018 [quote user="TCCANARY"][quote user="BarclayWazza"]Am I right in saying Nepo Tom was responsible for the failed sponsorship of the South Stand by that coffee company? If so, I''d hardly suggest that he''s that intelligent![/quote]No you''re not right, that was a wind up.[/quote]Well obviously somebody was so as you have been so assertive that it was not him you must know who was TCC ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TCCANARY 263 Posted September 10, 2018 [quote user="TIL 1010"][quote user="TCCANARY"][quote user="BarclayWazza"]Am I right in saying Nepo Tom was responsible for the failed sponsorship of the South Stand by that coffee company? If so, I''d hardly suggest that he''s that intelligent![/quote]No you''re not right, that was a wind up.[/quote]Well obviously somebody was so as you have been so assertive that it was not him you must know who was TCC ?[/quote]Try the Commercial Dept.?https://www.insidermedia.com/insider/central-and-east/canaries-name-new-stand-sponsor Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TIL 1010 4,738 Posted September 10, 2018 It is only reasonable to expect the commercial dept to announce sponsorships deals as opposed to a Board member but that article does not say who was the driving force behind it. It might not have been Tom Smith but then again it could have been. You do not know for sure one way or the other TCC and neither do i. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TCCANARY 263 Posted September 10, 2018 The link between Tom Smith and the Galway Roast deal was definitely a wind up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted September 10, 2018 Probably more like stirring considering the sponsor. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duncan Edwards 2,231 Posted September 10, 2018 [quote user="TIL 1010"]It is only reasonable to expect the commercial dept to announce sponsorships deals as opposed to a Board member but that article does not say who was the driving force behind it. It might not have been Tom Smith but then again it could have been. You do not know for sure one way or the other TCC and neither do i.[/quote]I know. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TCCANARY 263 Posted September 10, 2018 [quote user="Duncan Edwards"][quote user="TIL 1010"]It is only reasonable to expect the commercial dept to announce sponsorships deals as opposed to a Board member but that article does not say who was the driving force behind it. It might not have been Tom Smith but then again it could have been. You do not know for sure one way or the other TCC and neither do i.[/quote]I know.[/quote]Perhaps when you retire from the law you no longer have to abide by the ''innocent until proven guilty'' maxim. [:D] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TIL 1010 4,738 Posted September 10, 2018 Maybe as you were so insistent that it was not him TCC as accused by some people you have evidence to back up his innocence which would be handy in the form of providing a statement before the CPS decide whether to go to court or not based on the evidence available. [:P] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,531 Posted September 10, 2018 I know too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,531 Posted September 10, 2018 So did that bloke who spilled the beans on here. He had inside information. Allegedly.[:|] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TCCANARY 263 Posted September 10, 2018 [quote user="TIL 1010"]Maybe as you were so insistent that it was not him TCC as accused by some people you have evidence to back up his innocence which would be handy in the form of providing a statement before the CPS decide whether to go to court or not based on the evidence available. [:P][/quote]Isn''t it up to the accuser to provide the evidence first? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TIL 1010 4,738 Posted September 10, 2018 An allegation is made malicious or not and it is investigated to ascertain whether there is sufficient evidence for a prosecution. Obviously during the course of the investigation such evidence to refute the allegation as provided by you would be obtained and put before the CPS. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TCCANARY 263 Posted September 10, 2018 [quote user="TIL 1010"]An allegation is made malicious or not and it is investigated to ascertain whether there is sufficient evidence for a prosecution. Obviously during the course of the investigation such evidence to refute the allegation as provided by you would be obtained and put before the CPS.[/quote]I''d like to call Duncan Edwards as my first witness.Insert relevant question here.Secondly, I call Nutty Nigel.Do you agree with Duncan?No further questions. [:D] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TIL 1010 4,738 Posted September 10, 2018 May i refer you to the phantom bog roll thief at May & Baker Social Club when numerous offences were committed over a period of time and despite accusations and names being thrown around nobody was ever prosecuted. I had an alibi every time as i was at the bar drinking that God awful Taddy despite having the finger pointed in my direction by Mrs Nutty. [:D][:P][;)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites